problem, let alone balance that, if we can't have the senate majority leader, who my opponent has endorsed and committed to, even though he won't come to that table and try to work out a solution. this is the most critical thing. we need a budget come to closure. number two, we need stability in taxes and we need stability with regulations. if we reconstruct this, it will mean job security. that is the north would go away. ..

the only way versus actually going to balance the budget is that they have to and that is the path forward our people in our country that we need to be very strategic. congressman bird voted for something called sequestration. it's a disaster. it's a disaster for defense and a disaster for jobs in this country. we need to do everything we can to do this the right way and that is the -- way.

there's a senator from oklahoma whose name is john coburn. he goes boo is in talks about how foolish sequestration is and how foolish those votes were that we need to be surgical. there are tons of great ideas on how we can stop spending money that we don't have on things we don't need but we also need to do everything we can to get people back to work and make sure that we have economic opportunity because if we do that, if we get people back to work, we not only will see revenue increase, we will see a reduction in the amount of benefits that are paid out and we have to have a corporate tax structure that works. we have got to sit down and solve these problems together but we won't buy pointing fingers to one political party or the other. berg: i'm proud of north dakota and i will put north dakota up against any state in the nation and impact of our country were more like north dakota are conjured to be a lot better off.

there is a clear difference between spending on the national level. we spent more but it was money we had. every session we balance a budget in north dakota. i would certainly challenge the senate majority leader who controls the vote, harry reid, who you pledge your support to has not come to the table. he has not come to the table for three years. sequestration, that was something that passed the house and pass the senate. is it right? no but as an isn't alternatively passed other savings. those savings went to the senate and harry reid again has not taken those up. we have to get our country back on track. the way we do it is bring people together and we have to have a budget and you have to have a plan. heitkamp congressman berg, what is interesting in the what i think you just said if you have the money you can spend it. i think that that is a fast-forward for disaster. i think which only be spending money that we absolutely need to spend and if we are serious about this problem, we have got to get people back to work.

we have got to bring back money that is overseas so we can invest it and i served in the state of north dakota for you know, 14 years as an elected -- >> moderator: just a couple of seconds to wrap it up. we are over time. thank you. our next question will be presented by mr. gaines. >> ms. heitkamp, representive berg. this question is initially for you representive berg. almost every plan for reducing federal deficits closed for closing tax loopholes although it was put there to benefit one interest group or another. if you agree with that, what specific loopholes would you have congress" x. berg: could you repeat the question? >> basically every plan for reducing the deficit called for closing tax loopholes although the tax forgiveness was put there to benefit one interest group or another. do you agree with that and what

specific loopholes should congress" x. berg: the big picture what we need to do with our tax system is a mess. there is no question. so it's in the house and what i've supported as a one year extension on the existing tax structure and then really do a conference of tax reform over the next year to lower the top corporate rate as well as the individual rate to 25% and then move loophole sets you have said and things that quite frankly you need an attorney and an accountant to figure out how to get them. we want to simplify the tax code so really our challenge is getting agreement on the other side to start in that direction. the senate has passed a death tax of 55% over a million dollars. this is a total difference in where we need to go. so from my perspective, there is really a couple of things. the number one issue is getting our economy going again and the way we do that as we have to

simplify the tax structure. where the panel of manufacturers that sat down and they said gee a lot of these benefits you are going to give, a lot of these tax objections you are going to give into it personally said it rid of those deductions and give us a lower simpler tax rate. so that is the bottom line, to move in that direction. heitkamp: you heard congressman berg say he supports a one year extension. this is the problem. there's no predictability in this tax structure. we hear they can get kicked down the road over and over again. that can't happen. i want to talk a little bit about the tax proposal, the ryan plan or the romney plan, because independent analysis will tell you this plan was supported by congressman berg does two things. it lowers taxes for the very wealthiest among us and increases taxes for the middle class. that is true if you want to make the system revenue-neutral. in the individual in tax, the

big items are mortgage interest deductions. would never eliminate mortgage interest induction. jirga protection, child credits but what their plan does is it takes away the alternative minimum tax which has an equalizing effect for the very wealthy. that is wrongheaded. i want to spend a little time talking about corporate tax because tax loophole i would close is the one that allows you to ship jobs overseas and get a tax benefit for doing it. we need to agree that the tax amnesty program that brings that money back with the condition that it be reinvested in american jobs, we can fix this but if we go with another short-term extension, we will avoid the tough work and we will once again kick the can down the road and do what we don't need to do in this country which is not solve the problem. berg: there couldn't be anything more clear. my opponent supports the tax. are corporate tax 35%, the

highest in the world. canada's is 15%. where the proposal that didn't pass to bring that money back. do you know what? harry reid, senate democrats said gee were afraid you might bring that money back and not just give it to the employees. we don't want you to pay out dividends. when we need to do is what we did in north dakota. in 2003 we tighten our belts and we didn't raise taxes but in fact in the last 10 years we lower taxes in north dakota because we have had the revenue and growing our economy. you can't raise taxes on america's economy. half of our small businesses take their taxes out as personal incomes income so unless you follow the corporate tax in the personal income tax rate you don't encourage job growth. that is the uncertainty that is out there that you will increase taxes and who will you increase taxes on? the death tax, do you want to give your business or farm or ranch dear children? taxed at 55%?

that's ridiculous so really what we need to do is we need a simple, fair program where an attorney or accountant can do there taxes and that will grow our economy and make north dakota and our country a global power again. heitkamp: waiver provost off there. we have the romney proposal in the ryan proposal and that is the proposal that congressman berg supported and i can stay with as much certainty as they possibly can that is not revenue chore -- mitchell when you eliminate the alternative minimum tax because it will lower the tax for the wealthiest. it will increase taxes on the middle class. that is not a path forward for job creation and for the american public. he says nothing could be clear. i've talked over and over again about lowering our nominal corporate tax rate. i think her corporate tax rate in this country is too high. we need to lower it that we need to broaden the base. he said all these manufactures are willing to give up their special benefits.

they have spent millions of dollars in lobbying to get the special benefits and that is why they continue to persist. what we need to do is we need to figure out how we are going to take the tax system from being one that the sickly benefits people who should jobs overseas, get that money back into our economy and i will tell you this. i'm not harry reid. i don't not a cent more clearly. i have a lot of respect for anyone who serves whether the republican side of aisle or the democratic side of the aisle but i am my own person and i have done a lot of thinking about this. has a lot of experience in a semi-know we can move the country forward if we just sit down and solve the problems. i have a bill that does some deductions but i won't tell you what they are. that is not the way forward. matt our next guest will be presented by cathryn sprynczynatyk. >> good morning ms. heitkamp in

senator berg. we will go to miss up to first. everyone talks about the need for conference of national energy policy. please outline the key positions that you think should be part of such a policy. heitkamp: i couldn't be clearer. i believe we have to have a position for fossil fuels, oil and gas and coal. is absolutely critical for our economy that we continue to grow our domestic fossil fuel industry. i also believe there has to be a path forward to renewables, whether it's biofuels, geothermal, whether we are looking at doing something with wind which as been incredibly important in our state. so it truly has to be comprehensive and there has to be a commitment from everyone to do it. let me tell you the other portions of this. we have to have a way to move our energy. we have a declining power grid. that needs to be fixed. we need to make the investments because that is the certainty and the in the redundancy we need for american manufacturing

and to grow our economy. the other thing we need to do is we need to have pipelines. the keystone pipeline was absolutely a folly on the presence part not to approve the keystone pipeline as a way to expand the north american energy base in the fossil fuel-based. we have all forms of energy right here in north dakota. i have supported it for years. i have been a defender of the coal industry and a defender of the oil industry and i will continue to do that in the united states senate. berg: i think we can learn a lot from north dakota. years ago we had many different policies that were really disjointed. governor hoven and i and legislators in the house and senate, we came together and put together power and it includes all of the above. it includes coal, oil and gas as well as ethanol, wind and other renewables. bring that system together really brought our focus of north dakota together to move in

that direction. our challenge in washington is when the president says all of the of, he means nothing from below. 85% of our energy in america comes from coal, oil and gas. are gasoline prices have doubled over the last four years. you talk about tough times for the middle-class. in america couple of things have happened. the median income has gone from 54,000 to 50,000. the price of gas has gone up -- in health care and health insurance has gone up $2500. these are problems. we passed bipartisan bills to move energy forward but the regulatory environment and again i go back to harry reid who controls what is voted on in the senate, has said i hate oil. oil and coal are making us sick and they are harming america. my opponent says she is from north dakota and she is pledged her support to harry reid.

heitkamp: as much as congressman berg would like harry reid to be standing up here don't think that's happening anytime soon so i would like to talk about my reg and who i am and what i have done. >> moderator: and i remind the audience to hold any reaction until the end of this forum? thank you. heitkamp: anyone who knows my history knows i've been involved in the oil and gas industry and involved in the coal industry for years. oil and gas, when times were tough, when oil prices were low we were able to pass exemptions and able to pass marginal wealth benefits for exemptions and reductions on the oil extraction tax and we were able to do enhance oil recovery. though several powerful tools that we use to help bridge the new oil economy. when i served on the commission, we started the whole series of discussions about horizontal drilling in what they can do and bringing new technology.

when i served on the industrial commission and when i was attorney general i went to minnesota. in fact i earned a late-night theater award for that work. i'm committed to north dakota synergy system and i don't know there could be a better advocate than someone who would stand and say i've been there, have this experience, can get the job done and i understand what those challenges are. that is what i'm hoping to do when i go to washington d.c., represents this growing industry and include in a biofuels and wind which the republican party is hostile to reduction tax credits. geothermal and every form of energy to make a work in this country. berg: obviously there is a problem. keystone is not dealt. it was not built because it was not brought up for a vote. our president has been opposed to it as well. our coal industry, one of the things that is done more than

anything else last year the epa came out with new regulations on coal plants and they were so stringent that you could not building new coal plant with the technology we have today. but do you know what? it was silent because no one is planning to build a coal or electricity plant because of the regulations and the uncertainty. there's a cloud over the energy industry. if we want energy to happen nationally like it is a north dakota we have testability. we have to stability in our taxes and our regulations. the regulations. we have to encourage rather than discourage the capitol to go into and develop it. heitkamp: if i could just comment? >> moderator: you have 30 seconds left in crossfire. heitkamp: in the last year we have had no coal-fired plants -- gone not saying it's easy but it can be done and has been done

and we need to push back against excess regulations. we cannot have epa determining energy policy and i have for sure as i stand here, i am firm in that belief that we have to do everything we can to protect the industry. we have regional -- that were in fact not even going to improve the quality of the air. matt we are done with cross talk right now. we are moving onto the next question. the next question will go to representative berg. how would you have voted on the farm bill passed by the u.s. senate? in your view what are the necessary elements of a good farm bill? berg: certainly had said publicly. if there were the only choice i would support the farm bill. there are challenges with it. it links wetlands and crop insurance to a lot of people in north dakota. you know, my great-grandfather

homestead in north dakota. i am an econ grad and i grew up in north dakota. my dad was a commissioner in agriculture is extremely important to me. what we need in agriculture and long term is we need the markets. we need the farm bill and a strong arm bill centered on crop insurance, absolutely no question that we need to ensure that open markets and a place is the price we need for a great quality crops in north dakota. the challenge we have in the house is the house ag committee pass the farm bill as well. that did not come out of the chamber and didn't come to the floor and i thought back -- fought back against republican leadership very hard on that specific thing. i worked bipartisanly to get that bill to the floor and it hasn't been to the floor but by my efforts along with other efforts we got the speaker the house to bring it to a vote and to pass the bill before the end of the year. this is just one thing that

happened with the last farm bill. we are not where we need to be but agriculture is the shining industry creating jobs of revenue for american we need to support it not create a cloud of uncertainty over it. heitkamp: for the first time in decades, north dakota is a member of the united states congress has not been on the ag committee. another vote that congressman berg took was the vote for the ryan plan. signaled they could take $160 billion out of the farm program and take a 20% cut to crop insurance and that was okay with north dakota. in the senate passed the farm bill and a crossed over, the house had an opportunity to take that bill on. what happened is absolutely inexcusable. what happened is gridlock and that gridlock from a partisan stand point but gridlock in the republican party. gridlock that said we are not going to take the farm bill because we can't get consent because the far right of the caucuses you aren't going to get

any crop insurance. we don't believe in crop insurance. we don't believe in the farm bill. you have to have someone who will stand strong for the farm bill. the congressman talked about the study he had. at the last minute he saw a lot of flurry of activity. with talk about the discharge position. the discharge position you circulated, you got eight signatures from other republicans. i don't call that success and i don't think that is the path forward. we have to have a bipartisan farm bill. we have to have people who represent the state who believe it's important enough to sit on the ag committee. berg: ag has been a nonpartisan issue for all -- for years. republican democrats got together and we came up with an option that would have reduction in spending but everyone came together. the last few months, it's been more partisan and that is one of

the problems we had in getting the bill out of the house. agriculture, the farm bill is only 20% of production agriculture. the bulk of it is the attrition, snap, food stamps to the one of the challenges in getting it passed out of the house was people not supporting the changes to the food stamp program. it is increased in spending 270% over the last 10 years. we could not get cooperation and support to have that small change. the other thing i would like to point out and this is for what it's worth, your attacks were manipulated attacks in europe attacks were politics over substance and we are trying to pull this farm bill together, bill that is critical to our producers. you jumped in and attack. what i would like to say, it can very clear in agriculture. agriculture is important to me. my cousin passed away last spring and he has a son that is in high school.

his son is taking over the family farm. his son will not be able to pharmacy is the farm program in place and has crop insurance where he can operate. agriculture's extremely important to me. heitkamp: congressman berg the question everyone in north dakota should ask is do we have a farm bill and the answer is no. we have the majority in the house who couldn't get the farm bill passed because you couldn't get your colleagues to agree with you. there is no ifs, ands or buts about it. the blame for not having the farm bill flies straight at the foot of the u.s. house of representatives. i care deeply about the farm bill. their farmers out there never were struggling wondering bout the safety net program would look like. if the plan next year's crops but they don't have the certainty. they don't know because now we will be negotiating the farm bill in the middle of a fiscal

crisis and i really wonder whether we are going to get anything that is anywhere near as good. berg: if this were not politics and i'm sure the last farm bill that expired you protested that expiration. i don't know where that came up but i did see protesting the expiration of the last farm bill. heitkamp: congressman berg we are looking today at who's in charge of the house of representatives who is our advocate in the house of representatives who will live reform bill in the bottom line is today we did not have the farm bill because of the failure in the house of representatives. that was your job and he did not get done. >> that is the end of crosstalk in their next direction -- question will be directed by you mr. king. >> education is important to me and my 11-year-old son. what is your educational plan and what role does the federal government have if any?

heitkamp: i think the federal government under the bush of administration with the help of senator kennedy, we expanded inappropriately the role of the federal government and education. i think "no child left behind" was wrongheaded from the beginning. i think it was the federal government takeover of local responsibility and the best education in the best education decisions are decided locally. with that said i think the role of the federal government should be assisting states in things like title i where you take a small school district like why mere north dakota where you have two students who are in need of special-education. they can bankrupt the local farmers providing that special education. there is a role for the federal government there. there's a role for the federal government to begin to look at how we can transition in higher education. i believe that the cuts to the student loan program and the

excess interest proposed to be charged absolutely inappropriate. we need to have an educational system that make sure that our kids have an opportunity to go to college and that colleges affordable. i think we also need to take a look at long-term headstart. it is ready to serve serve and the ryan plan actually takes literally thousands of kids off of headstart which can add to the burden of local education because those kids are not ready to learn. i am very passionate about education. berg: education is the bedrock to our future, there's no question and north dakota represents a strong state that supports education. the number of schools we have, k-12 and higher ed, tensely critical. i were to say this. as it relates to education this decision not to be local. the challenge we have in the challenge i see in the legislature was a lot of federal programs coming down with rules and regulations and red tape that made it almost impossible to implement the highest impact

like we do in north dakota. when one-size-fits-all rules are made in washington where they sue every community of at least a million people that does not work for small-town north dakota. what we need to do is do everything we can to get those dollars to the states and to the local communities with his few strings as possible. "no child left behind," there's no question that started out a bipartisan thing with good intentions and it has failed miserably. i sponsored a bill, and a+ built that allows states to opt out of "no child left behind." we need to again put those, put that power with the local school board and put it with the state legislature to move forward. heitkamp: i agree with congressman berg. this is an area for any of us who have been involved in education and north dakota know that if you leave our education of the federal government that is a path forward that we don't

want. that is not a path forward for north dakota so it needs to be local decisions. the good news is that you are actually seeing waivers and they're only 10 states that haven't gotten away from the air in the pipeline to do that. the question is how do we guarantee a good education and the federal government should he setting the standards and parents should be setting the standards. parent should be involved with local parents groups and with the teachers. i think the best education plan in this country is making sure sure that we educate teachers appropriately, we continue to educate teachers and we continue to have the ability to hire people who care deeply about children. i wouldn't be standing here for one for public education and i wear my grandmother's high school graduation ring. she was never so proud in her life if she was when she graduated from high school.

unheard of in her day and a reminder every day to me that i'm blessed to live in a state the cares about public education. i think we need education locally. berg: the other component here is higher ed. the same issues with comply but the other part of that is we need an economy that is growing. we are so fortunate in north dakota. if you look at our national economy, barack hope obama's failed policies, 50% of college grads across america do not have a job. they or their unemployed are not working their degree so we have to -- to 10 years ago heidi proposed students to stay in north dakota, and other big government solution. offering $5000 to stay in the state of north dakota. that is not why we have our kids coming back to north dakota. we have them because we created a stable environment, stable tax environment, stable right as rain breman and we encouraged businesses to grow and to invest in small business. that is really what we what we e done in north dakota that is

qasr growth and success in the same thing we need to do is trust the individual to create stability in our federal government. right now we have been stability. heitkamp: commerce and i'm not going to apologize for wanting to help students from north dakota who want to stay in north dakota pay back some other college debt which is the 5000-dollar deal. i am proud of the position we took, trying to help north dakota student so that they are not burden for the rest of their lives with this incredible college debt. a third of all the benefits that profit the bank of north dakota in april when i was there and i will take some responsibility for this, came on the backs of students and that is wrong. student mob programs should be nonprofit to the government and we have got to help students out. berg: the student loan program was taken away from north dakota through obamacare. matt that is end of crosstalk for that question. our next question will be directed by --

>> the next question is for senator berg on foreign-policy. our ambassador was killed by terrorists in syria -- arab spring is turned stormy. the united states and hundreds of millions of dollars in federal aid to countries around the world to democracies and dictators. what should be the basis and the guiding principles for american foreign policy? berg: fundamentally i would have to say it's something we need to encourage across the world but let me talk about christopher stephenson what happened there. ..

heitkamp: i think our guiding principle are to be what is in the best interest for america first? if you take a look at egypt, under the original plan, we gave tremendous amounts of foreign aid to the state of egypt. egypt is threatening israel. egypt is threatening the region because of the arab spring. we have to rethink the dollars

that we are sending to egypt. we have to say that these dollars are for maintaining a security and peace and if you are not participating, you do not get these dollars. that is job one. we have to continue our commitment of foreign policy to israel. israel is our strongest ally and our sister country come and we need to do everything we can fulfill our to fulfill our commitment. all of the foreign aid is spent right here in america un-american jobs. that is when the requirements. we need to gather up our allies and protect the people who serve in our state department we can

secure them, they shouldn't be there. >> moderator: i'm going to go forward, but what you think should be the basic guiding principles, speaking a bit more probably? berg: if you are referring to dollars spent, or in general, our foreign policy, america is the leader of the world. we need to look where there are opportunities to create democracies come and we need to be supportive of those. you know, one of the been challenges that we have is iran. iran is, you know, getting close to having nuclear capabilities. from a foreign policy standpoint, we have to support the democracy that we have with israel there and will be can to

prevent them from having nuclear capabilities. the next step is to move nuclear bombs very easily around the world. as it relates to our foreign policy, we need to try and again, make sure that americans interests are kept first and we need to be close to make sure that we are not putting our country at risk and these terrorist countries, i think that that should be what drives our foreign policy. heitkamp: i cannot say this clearly enough. we cannot be a nation builder of every nation. we have to start building our nation right here at home. that is the strongest kind of security that we can have, which is economic security. making sure that we are going our middle class. when we look at our interests.

we let them manipulate currency we have to look at what the trade policy is. berg: what we saw the economics and what happened after that, it was a crisis for our country. we have to be strong economically. we have to be strong domestically and that makes us a force to be reckoned with on an international basis. >> moderator: we will move onto the next question. what do you think is the biggest misconception that north

dakotans have a value? heitkamp: that i can't swing a bat very well. that's not true. [laughter] i always feel that people know me. and what i would say is that for the last, certainly, six months, you have said and you have seen commercials that say you cannot trust heidi heitkamp. she's not lucey said she is. i think most people know that that's not true for the people that are doubting come i want to tell you that i was given a gift 12 years ago. when i was able to survive stage

three breast cancer and i was given a gift the gift of life. a gift of every opportunity to serve the state and do the right thing. i believe in my heart that when i go to washington, i will serve the people of the state of north dakota. not a political party or a special interest, but the needs of the people. that is why i am doing this. it is because of my opportunity and what i have been given, this gift of life, that i feel so strongly about. this is who i am and this is what i believe. you can trust me to represent north dakota. >> moderator: mr. berg? berg: i worked my way through college and lived the north

dakota dream. i want to ensure that any one of our sons or daughters or any rest can have the american dream. i see that going away i am committed to preserving a promise. both were for today and for seniors in the future. >> moderator: what specifically do you think people have a misconception about to be pick one thing? berg: well, then maybe think that i am a cleaner housekeeper than i am. [laughter] i just feel so strongly about that. there has been a lot of different hats.

it is awful to have those people demonized for a political campaign. heitkamp: in response to that, this is what i would say. in the last how many months, i have had a slew no involvement. but yet we have reports that say i am an employer that say that i own a business and we have an affidavit that was signed by congressman berg, saying that he was affiliated with this company. he did a series of interviews in grand forks thing that we run these companies together. i think it is unfair for him to basically say that it is a clerical error or someone else's mistake, one in fact, every piece of evidence except for what's being discussed right now actually points to this.

berg: we started a business out of college. a lot of business to start another business. it was a commercial real estate business. after i left midwest management, and changed its name. i have not been involved in the business for 26 years. but i am not being attacked. i am being attacked on a business i haven't been involved with for 26 years. what is frustrating is the employees and those who have grown the company -- i don't deserve any credit for their growth. they don't deserve to have their work discredited and demonized for personal gain. it would be like a few years prior to that, i said everything he epa does, it is because you are responsible for this. that is wrong. you know where my ownership is.

>> moderator: congressman berg, i'm pretty sure that if you are trying to be blamed, it would be a long night. berg: no doubt about that. the local television station here fact check these claims. heitkamp: it is a matter of perception and a matter of backing away from it. but the reality is that when you fact check independent sources, not me -- berg: is just awful that we have a company -- a north dakota company, you are taking advantage of for political gain when we have a state of housing is so desperate right now. i think that is wrong and always the that is frustrating. heitkamp: out of all of us, we

still hear stories about people who have been denied their security deposits and they have suffered. >> host: stress disorder from assaults -- we have heard story after story. i think it would be wise that company to re-examine their policies. >> moderator: [inaudible question] berg: we are one budget away from going the way of greece or coming back from prosperity. i will do everything i can to reach the agreement.

number one is taxation for the second is the budget. the other thing is regulations. you know, we have had a number of bipartisan bills. the one of the most important bills that we have passed out of the house -- what it is is an agency passes a bill and the legislature passes a bill, goes to the agency. before the rules are imposed and the public, republicans, democrats and they improve those four goes to the public. that is what we need to do from a regulatory standpoint. it is another bill that is sitting in the senate and has not been brought up. i can appreciate heidi saying that she is not very read. the problem is that put him in power and he won't bring those bills took florida. 70% of the bills have been

cosponsored on a bipartisan nature. that is the way that we are going to move this thing forward to lead to take control of the senate and reach out in a bipartisan way. heitkamp: he said that he would vote the way he wanted about all a vote on all of these issues -- issues of taxation. last year, congressman berg, when they were trying to solve the problem with the fiscal cliff, to congresspeople, one democrat and one republican, started working on a bipartisan solution to the fiscal cliff. grover norquist pick up the phone and said, no compromise. no compromise. if you compromise, we will come after you and get you in the primary and we will take you out of your seat. it scared people from actually getting it done. these are the partnerships that congressman berg has established. it does not bode well to send

someone who establishes those partnerships when you are talking about compromise. when you look at my record of working across party lines in the aisle, i think you will see some remarkable things. partnering up with the constitution party to fight back on privacy invasions and partnering with the head of the republican party to protect private property. partnering with anyone who will work with you in the legislature i have a record of working across party eilers pension files. berg: you know, the problem in washington dc is the partisanship. the best example of that is obamacare. here is a bill that was passed that did not go through the normal committee process. it was done behind closed doors.

republicans and the u.s. house of representatives, their life has been taking care of patients. they were not included in any of the debate. in fact, we all know by nancy host by nancy pelosi and the speaker of the house. there is not one republican vote on the this bill. seventeen were 16 billion and medicare -- when i pass, my opponent did not stand up and say this needs to be a partisan. we have to see it in the rearview mirror and the republican message is getting out. [talking over each other] the one neither one of us were

in this situation, we voted 33 times to repeal the act and never once introduced a bill that would replace it. as i have been saying, there are good and bad in the health care law. we need to keep the good and get rid of the bad. when they say let's get rid of the bad stuff, there would've been better dialogue and we would be further ahead. i agree with congressman berg, this is all too important to politicize. the last two election cycles, there has been an unwillingness to sit down and solve the problem in this country of health care, because they would rather use it as a political wedge issue.

berg: it was shoved through in the middle of the night even though some people didn't want it. my opponent went around the state and in rallies to campaign for it and push for it rather than get the input. the way that the process works is that we need to have open committees bring everyone together, patients and providers to work out a solution that is right for north dakota. >> moderator: okay, thank you. unfortunately, we are out of time for tonight. we are going to begin her closing argument. you each have 90 seconds to provide a closing statement. we will start with you, representative berg.

berg: i would like to thank the sponsors and the moderators and heidi and everyone that is listening at home. here in north dakota, we don't hide from our problems, we fix them. we don't wait for someone to tell us when to work or were at work or at work. we just work. we would rather live within our means and force their kids to live with our debt. you know, i have traveled and have talked to people about the challenges facing our country. one guy summed up. he was a superintendent. he said that every day i see students. i'm worried about the future. he looked me in the eye and said rick, you have to get this fixed. that is why i am in this race. i am here for my 13-year-old son and our children and grandchildren. i am willing to stop washington from ruining our economy but that we cannot do that. i'm running to stop overregulating our economy struggling our economy. i want to stop obamacare for making our health care decisions for us.

i am running because i believe that we can fix this and we can restore the promise of the american dream to our children and future generations. if we take it for north dakota way to the u.s. senate. i would appreciate your support in changing america. thank you and god bless. heitkamp: i would like to thank congressman berg and all those standing here tonight. the people that come with us and who are watching the debate. you know, i would like to tell a story. after we have long discussions across north dakota, and i have been everywhere in the state and have talked to all kinds of people. i have had so much fun in reconnecting with north dakotans. after we talk about partisanship and what is destroying our future for our children because we don't solve problems and we have a government of slogans and not solutions, we have a government of partisans that don't care about the american

public to do the right thing, people say that they get that they feel that way. and i really believe that you think you can go to washington and fix it. so tell me how you're going to do that. so i told him a story about when i was attorney general and i was fighting the fight on domestic violence and getting out there and trying to change the way we dealt with that problem. an older gentleman came up and put his finger in my face and said listen here, girl, you can't stop us and i said, you know, i don't think that's true. i certainly hope it's not true. but i do know that i can't live in a world where we don't try. i want the opportunity to try. to fix america's problem and fix the problems for our future and my children and for rick's son and for all of the children of north dakota. for all of our futures. thank you so much. >> moderator: i would like to thank the candidates and dakota

media access and the bismarck tribune and the others, like the volunteers, who organized this debate. thank you to the viewers at home. thank you for taking time to learn about the issues and more about our candidates for the u.s. senate. this program will play several times on government access cable channel two. it will also be available for online viewing at three tb.org. in the days leading up to the election on november 6. before we close this, i want to remind you that voting is very simple in our state. you can find that voting information at your county auditor's office or from the office of the secretary of state. thank you, and have a great night. [applause] >> tomorrow night, watch the presidential election results, along with key contacts in the senate, senate, house, and governors races on c-span. next, charles summers debate cythina dill for a seat in the

state of maine. followed by bernie sanders facing off against john mcgovern and other candidates for a seat in vermont. >> for the last four years, the status quo in washington has fought us every step of the way. they have spent millions to stop us from reforming the health care system and reforming wall street. they engineered a strategy of gridlock in congress. refusing to compromise on ideas that democrats and republicans used in the past. but they are counting on now is that you'll be so worn down and discouraged and so tired of all this function, you will just give up and walk away and leave the powers that be in power. >> my conviction that better days are ahead is based on proven results.

and on unshakable faith in the american spirit. anyone who fears that the american dream is fading away? if there is anyone who wonders whether better jobs and paychecks are a thing of the past, i have a clear and unequivocal message. with the right leadership, america is about to come running back. >> tuesday night, watch live coverage with president obama and mitt romney. plus victory speeches and concession speeches from across the country. plus, your reaction by phone, e-mail, facebook and twitter. it starts at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. next, a debate for the u.s. senate seat in the state of maine. cythina dill faces charles

summers. danny dalton, angus king, and tim woods also participated. >> good evening, i am jennifer brooks. your vote 2012, u.s. senate debate. we are live from the gracie dierker and i am joined by susan sharon and aj higgins. the questions come from the staff and members of the public. we want to thank everyone who submitted questions. many here tonight are hybrids of several questions that came from you. we have six candidates in just an hour, so let's get started. here are the candidates who have qualified. danny dalton, and independent. he has served in the military as

a dea agent and security consultant. cythina dill is currently a state senator and a lawyer with a background in civil rights. and andrew ian dodge, and independent. he is a freelance writer who has served as a coordinator for the tea party patriots. angus king of brunswick. he is a lecturer at the logo in college. also, charles summers. he has served in the maine senate and regional head of the u.s. small business administration. and steve woods. he is ceo of a global marketing firm. he has also worked as a professional sports agent. welcome to you all. in the first segment of the debate, we will tackle broad issues. you each have one minute to answer the question. our moderators will ask the

first question. susan? >> moderator: we begin with a question that many want to hear about tonight. whether you think climate change is connected to human activity or not. what strategies are necessary to help the u.s. deal with economic disruption caused by severe weather patterns. >> speak. dalton: what we can do to address this relationship between the state and the federal government as far as fema and other things go is to

make sure that we address the mismanagement in our government. i would put multiple agencies. many of them tend to cut back on the waste of mismanagement. what we should be doing is making sure that we look at all the different agencies to cut back and make sure that they are directing resources in a proper way. >> moderator: cynthia dill? dill: it is a scientific problem that needs a solution. the government can play an important role by making sure that fema is adequately funded and making sure that there is insurance for companies and they are insured against risk it

posed by extreme weather. we certainly have to make sure that we reduce the reliance on fossil fuels and carbon emissions to head off future damage. i believe we need to make sure we do it on a coordinated and widescale basis.

dill: it will probably be changing back and forth compared to what it normally was. i think we need to be very careful about major economic decisions that will crucify this country. ..

>> it seems to me we have to stop burning fossil fuels and move from oil to natural gas as soon as possible because natural gas is much cleaner than oil or coal, but at the same time we need to work on the development of renewables, which are going to be the solution. whether it's tidal, onshore, solar is tremendously -- has tremendous potential. the bottom line is we have to move on this, and i spent earlier this week at the climate change lab. the word they gave me, which really scared me was, abrupt. this can happen very quickly. >> moderator: charlie summers. summer: i think without question our activities have an effect on our

environments but there are many natural phenomenonons that contribute to this and what we have to be careful about as a government is not to do knee-jerk reactions and do things that will adversely affect our economy and put the united states in a bad police in terms of international commerce and competition. we have to be careful about what we do. we have to be good stewards of our environment. we all breathe the same air and drink the same water and we have the best interests of making sure our environment is clean. but i don't think we can blame one source. we have to make sure that whatever we do, we do so with an eye towards our economy, an eye towards job, an eye towards making sure that we don't continue to run our debt up and put our country in further debt. >> moderator: steve woods. wood: first i'd like to say that it's greet to be here, and unlike mitt romney i wouldn't defund big bird or you, jennifer.

i disagree with secretary summers. it is science. it's not politics. it's not abstract, let's wait and see. it's a critical science issue. the oceans are practically four degrees warmer than they have been. we just come off the warmest year in our history, and nobody can pinpoint hurricane sandy and isolate that's directly about climate change. but you cannot look at the signals, can't look at migration patterns, as angus just mentioned. here in maine we have a great resource. 75 professors and scientists, all universally say it's critical, and bass maine is a coastal state we're sensitive to this issue and, i wish the policy would stop. we don't have to debate gravity or physics, the worldes round. let's accept climate change and work aggressively.

>> moderator: here's the next question. >> in maine, 16% of the population is age 65 or older and another 31% are between 45 and 64 years old. most either are depending or plan to depend on social security and medicare. can they rely on those programs? and how will you influence those benefits as maine's next senator? we'll start with andrew dodge. >> i would just point out that angus supports the keystone pipeline and the -- which is contradictory. when it comes to mobile security and medicare, it's important we protect the programs. we have to shore up the financial stability of both programs. when it comes to social security. what i believe needs to be done is to raise the income tax so that people who make over $110,000 will be contributing to the program, and that's shown

that will largely take care of the problem. when it comes to medicare, we should make changes. we can renegotiate part d. right now medicare can't negotiate for prescription drugs on a large-scale basis, which is not smart. with do that with medicaid, and we'll save significant sums of money over time. so i am firmly committed to protecting the social interest programs because not only are they important for maine's population and the economic security of our retirees, they're especially important for women. >> andrew dodge. dodge: i'm about to hit the lower level. when we talk about social security and medicare, there's a lot of fear mongering that anybody who wants to do this to the current northwesterns. i think that's wrong. we shouldn't suffer in the state

and bad funding of the previous years on the current people there however, 20 years hence, 30 years hence, for people just getting out of high school, should we have more choice for individuals and how they prepare for their retirement? or how they take care of themselves? absolutely. whether it's vouchers or taking it on themselves, there needs to be choice. don't take it away from the people who don't want choice but we need to allow americans to do what they think is best for their futures, whether it be medicare into their older years. >> moderator: angus king? king: social security is in much better shape than medicare. some relatively minor changes, particularly raising the cap on the income that is paid in, and perhaps in 20 or 30 years raising the retirement age, will put social security on an, a waral sound base. it has been since 1986.

medicare is another case entirely. i know that charlie is going say, i want to cut $716 billion out of medicare because i support. he is nodding -- because i support the feareddable care act. that's not true. that my comes out of the budget but from from recipients. from provides and insurance coes and goes back for preventive car and to close the doughnut hole. the aarp are a leading advocate for seniorness the country, says that statement isn't true, and that the important thing for medicare is, we need to fix the way we pay for healthcare generally. medicare is an issue. but we have to get away from fee for service. and get more toward paying for health instead of sickness. >> thank you. charlie summers. summer: i will disagree with angus on thus. when it comes to medicare, the affordable health care act will

cut $716 billion out of it. i want to be very clear about something. i will not support legislation that would do that. i would vote to repeal affordable healthcare act when it comes to social security, will not support legislation that would change benefits for those people currently in the system, and i say that because i have benefited, my family has benefited from social security when i lost my first wife 15 years ago. social security helped sustain our lifestyle, and helped me raise those children, so i am not going to do anything that's going to affect social security. on the beginning, people coming into the system right now, we might have to change our retirement age, sure, people on the upper end of the income scale, like governor king, may not be able to get as much in social security payments, but we have to make sheer that those in the system are protected and the advertisements suggesting i would cut that is false. >> moderator: steve woods. wood: i think social security and medicare and medicaid is being

entitlements and i don't look at them as mandate that require legislative definition. the mandate is who we are as americans, what the united states has done for 236 years. our -- protecting and supporting the weakest members of our society, the most vulnerable, whether it involves prenatal care, babies 0, seniors, and so something -- to me it's also a -- we'll have more recipients and more people depending on this programs can fewer people contributing so we have to be smart about it. i would not support anything that in any way compromised the levels we currently have and also the dignity for the seniors. i personally believe that we as a country need to learn more from our seniors in terms of business, and to talk about cutting a program that i think disrespects that principle is wrong. >> moderator: thank you.

danny dalton. dalton: i agree with angus on the social security issue. a few technical changes are all that's needed. fear mongering that goes on in washington, trying to accuse each party of not being able to provide for our senior citizens and making them afraid of not having social security is just an indication of how dysfunctional our congress is, and the two-party system. so that's an easy fix. but on the other hand, our medicare problem is not an easy fix, and we have to come up with a formula to address that problem. the only way to address that is going through our -- appeared before the senate finances committee, four comprehensive tax reform, and by comprehensive tax reform i mean something besides just pretending you're going to just the income tax from lowering it to raising it.

we have to get rid of the swiss cheese type of tax system we have and go to something that's comprehensive, such as a value added tax or sales tax. >> moderator: thank you. susan chandler. the next question to andrew ian dodge. currently there are 3.6 million jobs open in the country and 12 million people looking for work. both employers and economists say maybe of the unemployed don't have the right skills to perform available jobs. what should be done to address this disparity dodge: ultimately it's the responsibility of institutions and what people take in college and high school. i have a political science degree, who, in fact, and limits your choices in life to being a political pundit or professor. i made that mistake.

others should be made aware they can take courses which have no practical use in the job market, and then wonder why they can't find a job. i think it is incumbent on professors, teachers, educators, and counelors to advise young adults how best to provide for their future employment possibilities. you hear that all the time from business leaders, would say we have all these jobs and no one to fill them. then people complain when we have to find employees from places like india and abroad, and they complain that these companies send the problems. king: this is a problem. i sat down with the chamber of commerce and say ted we have 500 empty jobs in your county we can't fill because the people don't have the skills.

high-tech manufacturing jobs. there's a disconnect between the educational system and the jobmark, and i think -- for example, just in terms of how complexity is, there's something like 55 different federal job training programs administered by nine different agencies. that's a recipe for both too much money, too much cost, and not enough coordination. so i think what we need to do is to have a closer link -- what told the folks, i'd like if i'm fortunate enough to be elected to put together a skills summit. not a job summit but a skills schmidt, so bring together the community colleges, technical schools, high schools, and university, with businesses to talk about what is actually needed so we can provide our people with the skills. to me it's heartbreaking to have empty jobs and unemployed people. >> charlie summers. summer: i think the government has to do things to get our spending under control and reduce our debt and reduce regulation so business

can expand and hire people and pay taxes necessary to support our government. i think more than that, when you consider that female veterans, for example, have a 24% unemployment rate, i think that is unacceptable. and we have to do things like i have done with the -- to work with the local regional chamber of commerces here in bangor and portland, and highlight the veteran employment issues. our federal government spends millions of dollars training our men and women who serve in uniform. yet when they come home they don't have a way to translate that into a civilian job and that's why i'm proud of the work we have done to try to bring the employer and the veteran together we can take advantage of the people we have already trained. that's a key thing we can do at a united states senator. >> moderator: steve woods, the job training disparate. wood: as the only candidate who owns a company that employs close to 100 people, i'm aware of this

issue. i believe in maine you can look nate terms of our local economy. 100 years ago jobs have always been tied to commerce. commerce used to be tied to proximity. people did work with people close to their village, where they could walk or ride a horse. 60 years ago, car transportation arrived to broad 'that, and then air transportation. now we have a global economy. the old economy was about shoes and agriculture, the new economy is this. not the hardware, but the software, the retail, the google. last book i was in california's silicon valley, working and talking to tech companies. we need to start k through 12 and we need to revamp maine's economy. we have a small economic engine, huge infrastructure. we can compete but we need to be closer to this, and while shoes were great for the economy and maine has great shoe companies, we need to be closer to this for the future.

>> moderator: thank you. danny dalton. dalton: our educational problem has been advanced since i was this tall. we have the same problems in education, tax reform can health care, everything is the same. nothing's changed. this whole idea that our congress, all of a sudden can't get along and address these problems is fiction, because what's been going on is that implicitly our represent-to-two parties have basically a monopoly over the country that are controlled by lobbiests. aren't addressing these problems, it's been decades and same problem. higher education is a joke because it's a big business. we have an implied guarantee by the -- from the government to these businesses that the student loans will be paid because people who have student loans have to pay it back. they can't go bankrupt. so basically they're being held hostage to a system that induces them and tries to have them go forward and take jobs and

careers or try to -- to pay student loans and they can't. so they don't go into careers that pay them. >> moderator: cynthia dill. dill: the jobs report indicates that jobs are up, manufacturing jobs at an all-time high and consumer confidence is up. so the economy is taking a turn in terms of the barrier between skills and open job positions, we have to first and foremost start with early oeducation. we have to support our higher institution office learning by expanding pehl grants and making student loans manageable. people talked about how colleges can actually apply to a job. we have to support legislation like the veteran jobs corps which was the victim of a filibuster, so we have to get after the problem in washington

and that's the filibuster raul. but government can play a role by focusing and funding, retraining programs, making college accessible to more people, and i think certainly putting an emphasis on education. >> moderator: thank you, cynthia dill. we'll be right back after a short break. >> moderator: welcome back. 2012 u.s. senate debate. in this segment of the debate each candidate will answer a different question tailored specifically for him or her. candidates have one minute to respond. >> if you had information that iran was on the verge of getting a nuclear weapon, would you support the president in the deployment of american troops to iran? >> i was in iraq for two and a half years. the last year i was there from

2006 to 2008. i worked as an intelligence advisor, during the surge, 12 hours a day, seven days a week. all the information came in, i had a top secret clearance. the we didn't do anything to iran at the time. that's disgusting. the american people should know things like that. with dough don't have the backbone to stand up to iran when they're killing our troops, maybe we should attack them but why aren't re attacking them now while they're killing our troops in afghanistan? the sources i provided to these agencies of i came back from iraq was so dysfunctional, these agencies, and please go to my webs to take advantage of the information i have to tell you there. the taliban is the improvised weapon from iranians, the syrian government is being provided government from the iranians. what are we waiting for? >> moderator: the next question is for cynthia dill.

you described yourself as the most progressive candidate in the race, yet polls show king siphoning votes away from you. what do you say to people who suggest you drop out of the race? >> the only poll that matters is the one next tuesday so i encourage everybody to get out and vote. and second i describe myself as a progressive democrat because i am and i start apart from angus king an 0 number of issues, bush tax cuts, keystone pipeline, women's right. askso it's not like we're interchangeable. i have different values and what i say to people, if you believe angus king is the best candidate, vote for him. if you think that what congress need, more women in the senate, people who speak clearly and are particular cattily where they stamped younger people, i you want true change you should support a candidate like myself who has been at the front lines,

fighting for working families and small businesses for ten years, while angus enjoyed a nice retirement. >> moderator: ondrew ian dodge. you advocateed the legalization of marijuana and hallucinogenic mushrooms. what drugs would 0 you not legalize? dodge: i believe drugs that occur naturally, it's ridiculous that somebody comes back with some wild mushrooms, one of them happens happens to the wrong kind and they get arrested. it's ridiculous. i'm not talking about things like mdma, and the various drugs that are manufactured. but if it's something like marijuana, which grows naturally, you saw a bunch of -- you can grow it in maine for god's sake. it's ridiculous to put all these people into prison.

after all, our prisons are filled with people who merely self-medicate with more and maybe magic mushrooms. it's overwhelmingly african-americans in prison because of it. i understand people don't want their children doing. i you don't ban these things. you educate them and say this is why you don't do drugs. you don't ban them, turn them into criminals, and our president did coke and marijuana. he got lucky. and a lot of other people just like him didn't and that's wrong. >> moderator: angus king, you are running as an independent and yet have expressed several positions which align with the democratic party's platform, including support for president obama, the affordable care act, same-sex marriage, clean energy. please name three of your positions that align with the republican party's platform? king: that's easy because i got a flier urging democrats to vote for cynthia because i was really a republican. so each side chooses its own

cases on this. i voted for george w. bush in 2000. i knew him as a governor. we worked together on projects. i didn't like the way he governed so i supported john kerry in 2004. i try to make my decisions on specific cases with real data. another area where i think i would differ with the democrats is on the dodd-frank regulation bill. i think regulation is important and crucial. that bill in my view, from what i have seen, out in the world, has gone too far. it's been a tremendous burden on our financial community and is actually hurting the economy by keeping banks from lending money. so there's a couple of cases where i would differ with the democrats, and when i was governor, i vetoed bills that the democrats wanted, i sided with the democrats one time. the republicans in one glorious six-week period they both picketed my office.

>> moderator: dodd frank is the on one you mentioned, there are others? >> that's one of the largest, dodd-frank. i'm skeptical of regulation, whether it's in the financial area or others. i want to be sure we're doing it right and we don't have unintended consequences that harm the economy. >> moderator: thank you. >> charlie summers in two 11 you declined to endorse your former boss, senator olympia snowe, because you said it would create a conflict of interest for you as sac of -- secretary of state. but tonight your running for the senate yourself and staying on as secretary of state. why there is no conflict of interest? summer: whether it's sect of state or the attorney general, there's a long history of those officers seeking higher office, and as an american i have he right to do that and it's important that the next senator is willing to go to washington and lead, cut spending and reduce the debt and do things with the regulations

that angus doesn't like aren't imposed in a way that hurts small business, but they are regulations that will allow small businesses to grow, and prosper so we can put people to work and people can feed their families. that's what i want to do. >> moderator: steve woods, you said back in june you would drop out of the race by october 30th if you trailed appearing gus king by more than 10 points. today is november 1st. inquiring minds want to know, why are you here? wood: when if made that statement -- first of all, i'm glad that the statement was covered because after i made the statement there was virtual media black you second of all, i had never met angus king before making the statement. i'm not running my campaign, then or now in support of angus king. i respect the governor and i feel like i'm most closely aligned to angus' positions. i'm still considering what my

options are relative to the race, and relative to this week. i'm here to speak on the issues. obviously because of current polls, i am not leading the race. some polls have me in eighth place, and -- which is a mathematical curiosity. but i'm here to talk about the issues. i'm here to talk about democracy. the solutions i'm trying to find don't exist on this side of the camera. i truly believe in my heart the solutions are out there in the audience. so in terms of what announcement i make and what my position is, that's something that i'll be discussing later. thank you. >> moderator: thank you. as part of the debate the candidates have an opportunity to question one another. we'll have 20 seconds for each question. and one minute for the answer. we're going to go in the other direction. steve woods you may ask another candidate of your choice a question. wood wood thank -- wood:

i'll go with secretary summers. i have great respect for your service to the country and great respect for your commitment. so this question is based on some areas. if you were not running today and you have been in government for 20 years, and there were five candidates on the stage, based on you putting country first and the state of maine first, which two candidates here tonight could you see based on your principles and based on what you believe is best for maine, would you select to go forward as the next u.s. senator? other than us yourself, if you weren't here, which two candidates could you see being best for maine out of the candidates here tonight? >> well, since you mentioned you're so close to angus, i'll take you out of the picture. i you want to look at who i think articulates their positions as closely as they can, i think senator dill

articulates her position. andrew does. so if i were not on this stage, i think i would have to look at one of the three over there. >> because -- i'm not qualified because of my connection with angus? thank you, secretary summers. >> charlie summers you may ask another candidate a question. summer: cynthia, you and i have seen commercials run by angus's friends to suggest i'm engaged to more than one woman i had someone from my office call me that said if i was engauged in a war onwoman i was losing because seven of my appointees are women. my question to you is, given that the democratic senatorial committee has not endorsed you, isn't it in fact the democrats in the war on women? >> i haven't seen the commercials you're talking about, because i'm out meeting

people, not making commercials. would say that republicans generally are waging a war on women, and we have seen from the comments of senator murdoch and todd akeynes and others, we see in the republican platform that denies women an abortion i even if it's a result of rape or inquest and the helm amendment makes it inappropriate, illegal, for women to be counseled on abortion services. there have the been people raped in the congo, and because of the helm amendment and the republicans they can't use their health clinics to give young girls counseling about abortion services. so i would say the republicans are definitely waging a war on women. we need more women in the senate. there's only 17% women. the we have the least representation in the world along with rwanda. i say we need more women in the

united states senate. >> you may ask somebody else a question. >> my question is for charlie. why in the world did you sign grover nordquist's pledge? susan collins didn't sign is, ohimy didn't sign it. many republicans said it constrains anybody's ability to work on this problem of a deficit in washington. 80 ceos said it's going to take revenues and cuts. why would you make a fledge a guy in washington who has never run for anything and not the people of maine. >> i didn't make a pledge to a guy in washington. i made a pledge the people in the state of maine that i would not raise their tacks. i believe we have tried it your way. same pledge that the previous governor took not to raise taxes. you left him with a billion dollar debt and i think we've been down the road of raising

taxes and not addressing spending. we have to get spending under control, get our taxes low so businesses can expand and keep our regulations in a reasonable level so businesses can thrive. i took a pledge to the people of the state of maine to make sure that their government is operating as efficiently as possible. and i believe that when we bring our expenditures on a downward glide and increase our revenues by growing our economy, then when those two lines cross, we'll then balance the budget. >> moderator: all right. andrea, you may ask another candidate a question. dodge: i think you remember that there was a shortage of -- i'm very concerned about the tactics of the g.o.p. where they're trying to suppress federal registration. you have a difficult problem here because you supported the other charlie -- supported the end of same-day registration.

you were obviously part of the cabal that took away ron paul -- the people who went to tampa. and you were one of the scabs put in their place. i know you said you didn't want to. isn't there a history of intimidation in the g.o.p. and what aim supposed to say to my potential supporters who want to vote or worried about that card with something called a striker on it, to find that it was sent out by the g.o.p. to find and challenge anybody who is trying to same-day vote. do you think this is something you into -- >> moderator: the question. >> i'm not sure what the question is. i think it was more of a statement. the registration cards, historically, whether it's been under my administration, it's come out in late auction which is when those came out. so i don't know what you're asking. people are free to register.

>> moderator: all right. cynthia dill you may ask another candidate a question. dill: my question is for you, angus in 1999 the maine legislature passed a law that would have given families 24 hours of unpaid leave to take sick children to the doctor's office and you as governor of maine vetoed that law and is a recorded in the news, you then appeared before a group of movers and shakers at the hotel and said the law would have cost companies like cf hathaway $120,000 in replacement worker costs, and without this company's knowledge or consent went on to say this could be the last straw for businesses in maine. that wasn't true, and the bangor daily news describes your speech as user fab fabrication and plate sal spin in this racer not

telling maine voter who you're going to caucus with and who should trust you. so given this utter fabrication about this vetoing a law of that would give parents the acknowledge to have unpaid leave. >> the family medical leave law -- we already had one, we were the only one of two states in the country that at-the threshold down to 15 the question is whether this statute went even further and would impose new burdens on maine businesses. and that's really a primary question you have to ask about any regulation. does the benefit of the regulation justify the imposition on a burden that could cost us jobs. that was my whole orientation when i was governor, was jobs. we added 70,000 jobs in eight years because we fought on all kinds of fronts, on the taxation front, the regulation front, and this was part of it. in terms of the caucusing

question, i want to be as effective a senator from maine is a i can possibly be. i also want to be an independent senator from main, one who can make decisions based on the merits and not what a party leader or a party tells me, and i think that's one of the primary issues in this election. >> you haven't answered the question why you lied to this group. >> that's a serious charge. >> danny dalton you may ask a candidate a question. dalton: i'm going to ask myself this question. since no one, including the media, has asked me this very important question, will ask it myself it why didn't senator collins, who is on the committee for homeland security, meet with me regarding the inability of our agencies to properly and effectively investigate terrorist information? no one asked me this question. the media, through the whole nine months-ten months, has not

had the backbone to address this issue. i have no good reason why she wouldn't meet with me. still hasn't bothered to contact me. this information is still relevant. i came back from iraq in 2008, and on my own, with my own money, developed a source network that brought in high-level information on the counsel, network, multidrug traffickers, and our agencies are incompetent. our senators are supposed to be confirming responsible leadership. to run these agencies. they're not doing it. it's a political mess. when i'm a dea agent, and i go down to -- one other agent and we're risking our lies to try to provide security to this country, and that's all the allocation of resources they can

provide us, two agents, and 75% of our drugs are coming in this country, have such a big drug problem, and we're trying to find a kilo of cocaine to purchase. that's disgraceful leadership. >> moderator: the next round this lightning round, questions meant to be answered quickly. one word will do, one sentence will do. more than that will not do. danny dalton, will you support judicial nominees northern to support overturning roe v. wade? dalton: i don't believe in judicial activism. dill: i will not. dodge: no. king: no. summer: no. wood: we have four out of nine supreme court justices in their 70s. absolutely not.

>> moderator: should domestic law enforcement agencies be allowed to deploy surveillance drones over u.s. soil? wood: no. i would not support drones over u.s. soil as a policy. i think that we need some mechanism and some -- >> moderator: one sentence, thanks. charlie. summer: it's a two-part answer, no, i would not. although i do think along the border. >> moderator: angus king? king: no. >> moderator: andrew dodge? >> no. dill: i would not. >> guys at 2,000 feet with a big camera, they're still being watched. >> moderator: danny dalton do you support a constitutional amendment to repeal the citizens united decision? >> no, it's ridiculous, everybody here has taken donations from outside the state. so why would you have -- repeal -- have an amount. >> moderator: one word or one sentence. constitutional amendment to repeal citizen united decision.

dill: yes, definitely. >> a flawed decision. don't believe in constitutional amendments. >> angus king. >> emfault tick yes ex- >> charlie summers i summer: no. steve woods used wood: i would repeal. >> moderator: do you believe basic health care is a right or privilege? wood: i believe be in united states, basic health care and life and respect for dignities not a privilege, it's a right. summer: i think access is a healthcare rate. king: basic health care access is a right. dodge: access and a right. dill: yes, i agree. dalton: affordable access to health care. >> moderator: danny dalton do you support federal funding for public braving in dalton. no dill: yes. dodge: with a $16 trillion debt? no. king: i think it all has to be subject the debt. the answer is i would certainly fight for it but we have to make choices. summer summer we have a

$16 trillion debt. everything needs to be put on the table. wood: i don't think it's a luxury. it's part of our humanity. i would support pbs and wmpm. >> moderator: drew believe investment income should be taxed as a lower rate than wages? steve woods, wood: yes, i do. king: no. dodge: yes. dill: i think long-term investment should be the same but short-term in. vein do dalton: interest loopholes should be closed. >> moderator: would you support a bill allowing student loan debt to be factored into bankruptcy filings? dalton: absolutely. banks are too big to fail. students are too big to fail. dill: yes, i would. dodge: yes. king: yes. summer: no. wood: yes, i would. >> moderator: this is from susan pope. a long question but i shortened to. i.

i will you publicly commit to not eliminating obamacare unless and until both the house and senate have a replacement healthcare plan? steve woods. wood: yes. i refer to it as the affordable care act, not obamacare. i think it's a critical first step and support and it wouldn't do anything to overturn. i. >> i think obamacare should be repealed. >> moderator: the question is, would you do so without having a replacement plan in place? >> that's a very long answer. i think there's a replacement. >> moderator: angus king. king: i would oppose repeal. >> dodge: i would favor repeal. dill: i would move to single pair universal health care. dalton: the republicans had two years to come up with a plan and they want to toe repeal it? that's silly. >> moderator: we literally have a few second, yes or no due support question 1 on the november ballot enabling same-sex couples to secure a marriage -- wood: look at my webs.

>> yes. >> no,. >> emphatically in support of all human flights question one for legalizing gay marriage. >> moderator: all right. well, we're moving on to closing statements. each candidate will have one minute to speak directly to the audience. we determined the number you all drew numbers determining the order before the debate. steve woods, will go first go ahead. wood: the. i'm not a politician, you can tell when i took my shoe off, that doesn't happen during political debates. truth be told this is the first time i've worn a suit in a year. i'm concerned for maine. i'm concerned for the united states. i love maine. i traveled to all 50 stateness my life time. i traveled to 20 different countries. i believe maine is uniquely special. every state probably feels that way but i think there's something indigenous to the people and spirit of maine. but i'm concerned for our future. morning specifically i'm 'concerned for the future of my children and their generation.

tonight you heard two candidates with very different views that espoused a doctrine of government is to blame, i don't share that view. you have had one candidate suggest that a younger attorney from cape elizabeth is previousable to older wealthy people from someplace else. that's myonic, and you have one candidate who runs commercials until 4:00 a.m. keeping me awake, saying another candidate is to blame with a crown on his ahead. don't think we should blame people. we should be looking for solutions and the solutions economist with the people in the odder toum and washington. >> moderator: charlie summers, goes next. summer: i appreciate to be here and talk about the issues important to this state and country. i think the choice the voters will make on november 6 is kris cal clear. we can choose one like former governor king who took a surplus, raised spending by 50 are and left us with the highest

tax burped in the country or choose someone like-by-wants to good to washington and lead the fight to cut spending and reduce debt and keep regulations reasonable so businesses can expand so that families can be strong and so our economy can be strong. i grew up in a small business. i've run small businesses. i served my country in the united states navy, serving in iraq and afghanistan. i come from a family that has service as a division, it's my great uncle, my grandfather was in world war 1, my uncle, world war ii, my father, korean country, my sister, marine corps and myself and my wife in the navy, so i go to the senate to serve gem, not a political party but a my country. i would like to be your united states senator. >> moderator: angus king. king: we've touched on health care, energy, economy, but we haven't

talked about the fact that whatever we believe about these issues, congress isn't work. that's why olympia snowe left. she didn't leave because she wanted more time. she left because she was utterly frustrated by the failure of our congress to be able to come to grips with these questions, and this isn't just an academic issue. about a month and a half ago a bill was on the floor of the united states senate to provide jobs to 20,000 veterans. it was fully funded. it lost 58-40. two senators voted for it. it needed 60 votes. because it was being subjected to a filibuster, not baas of the content of the bill, but because there was a political motivation to not let the president have a success this close to the election. i think that's a horrible way to make decisions. the question that should be asked is, what about the veterans? we need to make congress work. if you think it's working, i'm not your guy. if you want to try to make a start at fixing it, that's why i'm running.

>> moderator: andrew ian dodge. dodge: thank you very much. it's a lovely venue and so nice to be here. ultimately, sending one of the two major parties' people here, candidates, and with respect, governor king to d.c. to to change things is like asking the kardashians to balance your checkbook. ultimately, we have a problem in d.c., and it's not doing the same thing over and over again that's going to solve it. you need so send truly independent people there, and someone with maine common sense background. my family goes back a long way in the state. we were here before there was maine or a country there are dodges who date back to prerevolutionary days. i got the name, common sense, on the knees of my grandfather and father. ultimately i ask you one thing. vote liberty, vote dodge. i look forward to serving you after november 6th.

>> moderator: cynthia dill. dill: thank you all for this opportunity to be here this evening. it's been a pleasure. my name is cynthia dill. i'm the democratic nominee for the united states newscast. i'm thrilled. i think there's so much we can be hopeful about. i agree that washington is broken but in my view washington is broken because of extreme politics and extreme wealth, and what we need to do to truly change things is to shake up the status quo, and in any view, both charlie summers and angus king respect in the status quo. extreme politics when it comes to our roman candidate who supports the tax pledge and denies the science of climate change, and an begun king's case, very, very nice man, honorable man. we have another extremely wealthy older white man, and i have nothing against extreme woldser extremely wealthy white men but they're represented well in washington and we need a new generation of leadership, somebody who would support openly president barack obama,

will caucus with the democrats and work towards addressing climbed change and work towards fighting the war on women and working towards protecting workers and make sure healthcare is available. protecting social security and medicare. i have a track record of fighting for maine. i look forward to going down to washington and being a strong voice for working families, for small businesses. >> moderator: thank you, sin do the ya. danny dalton you have the final word. dalton: thank you for allow flowing be here and speak. it's been tough this last three or four months trying to get the word out, because our mainstream media is dysfunctional like our congress. the two parties control our congress and have since time immemorial are dysfunctional. they're not getting the job done. it's disgusting. i don't know how you people can stand here and vote for the two parties. charlie is a great guy. cynthia is a great woman. they wear the cloak of the two parties, the two parties are the problem. everything else you see around it, all the different things we

have been talking about, are just issues. the problem is the two parties that aren't addressing the issues. angus king, is a great person. but he has taken money, talking about the -- having amendments to stop that why would you be taking millions of dollars from outside the state? the whole system is dysfunctional. you have to get independents in here not taking money from major lobby groups and i hope you address that at the polls. >> moderator: thank you very much. i want to thank all the candidates for taking part. a special thanks to gracey theater. hofstra university and the staff and students of new england school of communications our partner in this production. don't forget to vote. election day is november 6th. good night. >> on washington journal tomorrow morning, gary how goes through the math of the electoral college and the votes

that president obama and mitt romney need to win the presidency. then we revisit the 2000 presidential election with former florida supreme court chief justice, charles wells, who presided over the bush versus gore race on the state level. and later, probal historian discusses the history of close elections. election day on washington journal, liervetion 7:00 a.m. eastern, on c-span. >> while you watch our election night coverage tomorrow, go online to our election hub. you'll find interactive maps with election result in the presidential race and the senate, house and governor contests, updates on the balance of power in congress, plus track the state ballot initiatives, all in real time as the results come in. election hub at c-span.org. >> you're watching c-span2. will politics and public affairs weekdays, featuring live

coverage of the u.s. senate. on week nights watch key public policy events and on the weekend, booktv, you can see past programs and get our schedules at our web site, and you can join in the conversation on social media sites. >> now, debate for u.s.a. senate seat in vermont. incumbent senator bernie sanders faces john mcgovern. this event includes candidates representing liberty union, and peace and prosperity parties. this is an hour and a half. >> before we conclude tonight we want to think lizzy for joining us tonight as our timekeeper. so, without any further adieu, let's begin. we'll begin with you, mr. stone. if you had 60 secondses with me in an el visit for and had to describe yourself, what would you say? >> i probably wouldn't say

anything, but let me try. almost 78 years old. been a candidate a number of times. represent a party that stands for peace, and individual liberty. and social justice, and i'm a member of the socialist party. the american legion, the veterans for peace, and liberty union. i'm an officer of liberty union. i live with my spouse of 55 years. i have four children. and jesse, paula, ian, and 15 grandchildren, and they all live within area code 05301, except for one who is about 17 miles

away. so my whole social life revolves around them. >> we're all product office our families and we have two branches on our family tree, our mother's side eurasian father's side, and today i wore some family heirlooms, niecetive american indian heads and my earrings to remind me tell you tonight that we have to take care of mother earth. my great-great-great grandmother on one family line was the leader of a tribe of a branch of virginians al gone quinn. so it's important to me. i was raised to know i was they great-great-green great granddaughter of this tribal chieftan, and it's so important to take care of mother earth, and i'm here to tell you we have to protect lake sham planing and we need to make. he. he legal under federal law.

>> two and a half years ago, i started researching who to vote for in the 2010 elections and i came across a chart that basically said, it hasn't mattered for the last 35 years. what party was in power. the national debt has increased. since that was my biggest issue, i decided to try to figure out a way to solve that problem, and i came up with a solution so simple. i called it vote to keep it short and simple. and it's just changing the order in which bills become law. we first write short and simple bills that solve our biggest problems in ways that everyone can understand. and most people can agree with. and then we vote for someone who signs a contract, to only vote for those bills as written. that takes the politics out of the position of representative, and that's what i decided to do, to run for office so i could get

this thing out in the open. >> thank you. just to remind mr. mcgovern me, question is if you had 6 other seconds in an elevator, how would you describe yourself? >> i was raised on a new england dairy farm. went to dartmouth college. i served few terms in the legislature in massachusetts. i went into business for a while helping american companies in southeast asia. and china. and moved up to vermont in the early -- late 089s, been active on town development review board, the budget committee, and i'm running because i care deeply about the future of this country and the big issue for me is also the debt and the debt rewe're leaving for our children and grandchildren, and the

disfunction in washington that in order to resolve that, we need to vote for a change. >> moderator: mr. moss. >> my name is peter moss. and i live in fairfax, vermont, and i am a licensed professional engineer, licensed in vermont, and in new york. i am running for legislative office, namely for the united states senate, because the job of legislator is to legislate. not create jobs or change the economic situation. pass laws that will do that. i have a left -- list of ten bills i will introduce, and if i am not elected, i will champion

those bills as a citizen. and since there are ten of them, i call them the most -- the symbol for ten items, and i hope we can get to that later. >> mark, i live in burlington. my wife, dana, and i have been married almost 50 years. we have seven grandchildren who are the love of our lymph was elect as the first independent in 1981 in burlington, and surfed e served as mayor for eight years and very proud of the role we played there in making burl ton one of the most liveable small cities in america. i was elected to the house of representatives as the fir independent in 40 years. elected six years ago to the united states senate, and i want to thank the people of vermont

for the honor of allowing me to be the longest serving independent in the history of the united states congress. my main concern is that the decline of the middle class. high levels of poverty, and the growing gap between the very, very wealthy and everybody else. >> moderator: you can join us tonight online at dpd.org, we have a live chat going on. the next question we'll start with you, chris ericson. some of you already addressed this in your opening. but your top issue, and please name one and not five issues. >> all right. my top issue is that there's all this controversy about whether or not israel is going to go to war with iran, and when president obama spoke about the big yellow bird, i don't think he was talking about the big yellow bird. i think he was talking big bird on tv. i think he was talking about

china. china -- chinese people, oriental people, referred to as yellow. china has the largest population on earth, a billion people. they have so many people that they force women to have abortions. they have no respect for human life at all. and china is friends with iran. china is trading partners with iran. if we help israel go to war with iran, then we're going to have to deal with an angry china, and i think that's a really big problem, and we have to just put a stop it to and negotiate peace. >> as i said in the opening statement, i really feel that our biggest problem is the deficit. but i believe that the reason why we haven't been able to lower the national debt is because our political system is broken. and we need to fix it or this will continue, whether we have a republican or a democrat in the

presidency or in the majority of congress. and the way -- it's by a constitutional amendment with those ten major changes. >> for me, clearly, it's the issue of the debt and the deficit. $16 trillion national debt. ...

>> what we have now is a group of of career politicians who run the reelection for life. this decision-makers are the bohemian club meeting once per year in california. the politics from the media for the bohemians own

manipulate the make believe that of the two parties that is really one party with the dollar defacing and the elephant face. i am running to reveal the truth about all of. >> nation's to deal with reality instead of the fake democracy. >>moderator: top issues mr. sanders? sanders: we have almost 15% unemployed under employed, family media and income has gone down by $4,000 per carat will work hard to create millions of jobs that our country desperately needs to be

building for structure putting people to work rebuilding word -- road san bridges. we need to move to sustainable energy away from fossil fuel. we need to rethink the disastrous trade policy that leads to outsourcing jobs and take on wall street to invest in the productive economy not the gambling casino. >> top issue is more. when you vote for every military appropriation to make sure it goes to the zionist government and palestine and the war continues in afghanistan and direct you vote for those appropriations you kill any possibility of social reform or help to the middle-class

mine is to talk about eliminating the military budget bringing us to burlington where the military budget shows up next. the militarization of the state of vermont and is being led by mr. sanders mr. sanders, mr. leahy and mr. google they're bringing 10 lockheed martin. the military industrial complex is here because mr. sanders invited them to pay $9 million to the university. that is ahead deal. we need to separate. >>moderator: while mr. sanders asks the

question you were a music. why? sanders: . moss: mr. sanders toxin generalities but never specifics. his answer is work real hard. you'll hear him say that five or 10 times during the one-hour broadcast because he tells the voters what he thinks they want to hear. but what does he have to do? >>moderator: i would give you a chance to respond but please clarify cris ericson will use adjusting mitt romney in the debate when he use the reference to big bird he was not talking about "sesame street"? ericson: i think when

president obama first raised the issue what he is really saying is to watch out for the big yellow bird that is china. >>moderator: mitt romney brought it up. ericson: he said it second. sanders: and with the transportation bill we will have $400 million to build roads and bridges and create jobs. we have greatly expanded community health centers now accessing the primary health care through the center's. we have expanded veterans' programs with primary health care all over the state. >>moderator: let's talk about gridlock we will start with you. what will you do to try to

break the gridlock? laframboise: the biggest problem is 2.fingers at. of that is what i recognized immediately to think of the solution to the problem. by simply changing the way we go to to write the bill first to turning our representatives in two representatives instead of legislators then bypass the gridlock to go to almost directly the three bills that i have researched the most people agree with the areas that i wrote the bill. mcgovern: the question and?

am i and favor of gridlock? >>moderator: what will you do to end gridlock? mcgovern: first come of focus on issues that unite us and not divide us. the rhetoric of attack, divide, class warfare that the incumbent senator frequently entertains is not productive to bring people across the aisle to work together. i think the debt is one of them. look at the simpson bowles commission members of both parties clearly there is agreement with serious issue that must be addressed. second, stop having people

go to washington who try to get reelected and forget about the public interest. i have said i will serve one term if elected. moss: i could not agree more with mr. mcgovern. my first of 10 proposed bills is from career politicians the gridlock believes the people to believe we have two parties. we only have one party. in the gridlock quote-unquote is proof of that sorry fact. if you call the party donkey's capitalist then you

do not have to parties because then they devote to free enterprise that is not the right answer. >>moderator: mr. sanders? sanders: congress is way out of touch with needs of ordinary americans. washington is influenced especially since citizens united with wall street. virtually all republicans and some democrats say we have to do deficit reduction to cut education, the sole security and traneight. others say ask the wealthiest to pay their fair share to do away with a tax haven in the cayman islands and look at military

spending. congress is out of touch because of big money. diamondstone: there is no gridlock. they get what they want. war. he says he is opposed for it by the votes for it and israel, the boats for the money for afghanistan and iraq. we amended not because of the administrative act but congress said they will cut off money. mr. sanders said he voted for the march 31st resolution that reads congress expresses the unequivocal, unequivocal support to the president

commander in chief for his firm leadership and decisive action and the conduct of military operations in iraq with the global war on terrorism. mr. sanders signed off and voted for it. most people think he is on his reputation of anti-war. he is not. >> the only reason we have gridlock is we have a national deficit. if we were in the black then there renowned dna argument. -- there would not be an argument. we need to have a flat and fair tax with social security. regardless how much money they should pay the same percentage of their in the come into social security with no cap at

$250 -- $50,000 or anything like that. all corporations should pay the flats and welfare tax if we charge everybody 2% across the board agreed would be in the black. >>moderator: has many of you know, , the military tranfifteen. >> you are elected to the u.s. senator, what would you do to protect my family and the children in south burlington when the f-35 sit to be classified my neighborhood to be unsuitable for residential use? mcgovern: now having looked

up the matter very carefully, it was new to me, the issue of the of 35 is not what we were all familiar with. hi went around the neighborhood and spoke to people all both sides and decided in my view it is in the best interest of the community and the state's not to support the of 35 coming in to burlington. right now you have the forthcoming i understand they will continue to fly another 10 years to give the guard which support very strongly the time to transition into other missions i think it is a deeply flawed proposal if the year forced makes the decision, and probably make the right decision it will

not be coming to vermont. moss: i am not opposed to the of 35 as much as i am to locating it in burlington. i can tell you this. vf 35 was designed to carry nuclear weapons. therefore it has on board at least two combined radioactive materials. that will create and in sustain a thermonuclear chain reaction. then you have a choice year

she met and burlington. it has not been brought up yet to. look back kazakhstan between iran, pakistan and iraq. sanders: it is absolutely true and many people are opposed to the f-35 in burlington. just a day 10,000 people released a petition in support of it. if it does not come to burlington is a disappear? of course, not it is the fighter jets of the u.s. airforce and navy and in a go. i worry about the picture of the air guard -- your guard and burlington. florida will get it. it is a legitimate issue.

what i pledge to work as closely as we can with the national guard to make sure we do everything we can to mitigate noise and environmental concerns. diamondstone: question number one of what to tell you about my shirt designed by my granddaughter emilie who was a very close friend of the family committing suicide. that comes to mind with the of 35 to burlington is a form of suicide turning firm wanted to bob crum ii. it is the straw that broke my back. we have to leave the union to join with other states perhaps the other states of

new england and every time i read the sentence for the resolution mr. sanders voted for 2003 grameen never denied is he voted to think the president for the war effort and iraq. ericson: bf 35 is designed to carry targeted smart nuclear bombs. it is not six minutes of norway's but nuclear proliferation of. when i was a child in the early '60s, vermont was the garden of eden since bernie sanders came in has gone to how we have to stop the how he puts us through we have to stop the f-35 and nuclear

proliferation. they can have it in south carolina but we could say no here in vermont. their other problems. solar flares, manassas says they will continue for another year, they disrupt communications and we could end up with a nuclear bomb detonating in burlington vermont. laframboise: i a represent three bills as the transeventeen candidates. the first is a constitutional amendment that says the u.s. and state constitution shall be interpreted as originally intended and amended. sense that has not happened been out why all five wars

have been fought without congress declaring war. if this is pass the whole military machine is called into question by we the people who can say this is what i want to get done or not get done. that type of protection is the biggest chance to decide for ourselves rather than a secondary age of what we want to have done in this country. >>moderator: you're watching a debate live from our studios here with vermont public tillage it -- television. mr. sanders if not in the running for this proposal and had to vote up or down on the f-35 would you vote

in favor of it? sanders: the up 35 has had mechanical and cost overruns. but that decision has already been made. talk to the department of defense it is the plain of the year force, marines, then maybe and also now the plane on record for nato. the simple reality is if the forthcoming is phased out the f-35 comes through the air guard base we would lose hundreds of jobs and i worry about the future of the vermont national guard in those who are serving in the educational opportunities and the impact the planes will go to south carolina or florida who want them. >>moderator: we've feel as

strongly about this? sanders: the broader question spending three times on military since we have 1997. do we cut military spending? we do. this is the play but it is the reality. if not to vermont then south carolina or florida. >>moderator: you would support the f-35 if vermont was not in the running? sanders: when you started years ago before i was in the senate is a different discussion. >>moderator: would use support it today if vermont was not in the running? sanders: it is here. it is produced. it is the plain of the nato and united states airports. it is a hypothetical

question. >>moderator: john macgovern some feel your opposition is because senator sanders supports it and it is expediency. mcgovern: at the reverse. said the most politicians do not make decisions based on the facts. let the chips fall where they may. one is to express concern of national defence. one of the problems politicians using defense budgets to help them get reelected as a pork project. not with the merit but to generate pork. congress established their realignment closure commission they recognize they read incapable to make

decisions based on national the fence. i made a decision based on the fact that i am greatly concerned about the residential area and it is not interest of the guard to go forward with the mission that any large portion of the community is a mistake. >>moderator: what about the people who work there? laframboise: again, my personal opinion does not matter. i represent bills rather than bologna. basically your best way to solve the problem is to go to almost directly a.

it will not have been if you vote for the bills yourself. >> what about selanne people they would lose their job? >> that is repetition. he is in favor of it because it will save jobs. what about the nuclear power plant in my neighborhood? i have been opposed since before was built now we talk about saving jobs and endangering the people. he comes here to cut the military budget to spread

all over the middle east to join with every military appropriation. >>moderator: thank you. >> they could find other work that is up to the state govt and federal government to provide unemployment. >>moderator: how do address the jobs question cris ericson? ericson: if you create jobs that create health hazards then you cross the taxpayers more money in the long run. with the death 35 if fed nuclear bomb does not detonate you have the six minutes of noise per day, the house shaking, a

people's nerves are rattling. there long-term chronic health problems. i lived on the mountain that day word detonating and 155 san bathhouse would shake and blood would come out of my ideas and nose and mouth i know what problems the military can cause. they should not be in a residential neighborhood causing them to be uninhabitable. >>moderator: you have a couple of candidates raise saying the nuclear issue as a threat in burlington. troupe? sanders: no. if you like the of the 35 or you don't. it is here it is the advanced jet fighter of the united states air force if

we louis the at national guard loses the mission a means hundreds of jobs and the future of the vermont air national guard i do not think that is good if we don't get it the folks in florida or south carolina i would rather have the jobs here in the state of vermont. >>moderator: with foreign policy there is a civil war and syria should united states do more to help the syrian government? moss: no. i and the peace and prosperity candidates. peace on earth. not just in the lower 50 or 48. i am opposed to bore because it creates more problems than it solves. going back i would create a

new federal department by merging two existing ones man they called the department of social and national security. that is fully funded then the rest goes to national security. i am not afraid of them attacking us. [laughter] sanders: as most vermonters know why not only voted against the war in iraq and after two wars will cost us

over $3 trillion added to our national debt. i do not think we should be involved in the war of syria. assad is vicious killing tens of thousands of his own people. we should arm the rebels to do it and a careful way. you do not want pullback for people to use them as against us as afghanistan with the soviet union. we should not be on the ground peter diamondstone he says he opposes the war but these words that i have read over and over. congress expresses the unequivocal support and a precede -- appreciation to the commander in chief, that was bush, for the decisive action in the conduct of

military operations of iraq as part of the ongoing war of global war on terrorism. i have the roll call with me voting every appropriation and for afghanistan and iraq. he is opposed? nonsense. the warbeck destroys the very thing he aims to correct. he will not vote against the guns. ericson: he lied about the effort 35 because they are designed to carry targeted nuclear bombs. if i anders stand, he lied end committed fraud with the outcome of the election.

they are designed to carry targeted smart nuclear bombs. rush of is the ally of syria it is an arms supplier and their trading partner is india. the russians answer is the. diamondstone: selling it to india up. they do not want to renew the at 1992 cooperative reduction program that is american financed. they do not trust america and they say they should not tell other countries what there moral values should be win papers show that we lack them in the united states. we have a big problem going on roadside to get into peace negotiations. >> and with health reform

men of them directly affect foreign policy because i believe we need to clean house before we stick our nose and other people's problems. the only thing that affects the war and syria you have to obey the constitution as intended and amended to require congress to declare war on any country where we commit troops to seven getting back to the jobs and a 35 and the jobs question or the jobs program come on the one hand the united

states independent business passes of built-in her business on the event and using the defense budget for pork that i find troubling. getting back to syria, by a greed denied the state should not be involved without a declaration we should go to war with great care to realize the cost of human blood and sacrifice but we should go to win. the issue of syria is tricky. we have to be proactive in a very difficult part of the world. >>moderator: you praise

the conduct of the president act with the iraq? sanders: then also read the part saying keying the armed forces in is one thing to vote against the war or lead the opposition but when the resolution comes that says many other things, that we give thanks for the men and women who served in the military, this state has lost a number of young people so i thought it was appropriate to say we think you even though i oppose the war peter diamondstone. diamondstone: the members of the armed services and their families. but there preissing go one is right out of the bush

catalog al qaeda. as a threat to the security of the united states, iraq has weapons of mass destruction. i am tempted to use unpleasant language. he voted for all of that but now the excuse is he was supporting their troops? malarkey. he was sending them to war. the only way he could support them. the 32 members of the house did not vote for this he did not have the cajones and to not vote against it. sanders: i led the opposition. >>moderator: excuse me. you discussed not supporting efforts then syria. what about libya? ericson: i would not

support . laframboise: that my a this did to us would go for something like this. i believe my a job is not to legislate but represent the people. our legislators now can look at the 2500 page bill to say i voted for this part because i did read but other stuff i did not agree with so i will sign it. this is the same excuse bernie sanders is using now. of part of it he liked because of that but yet he can get away with doing that simply because the bill is way too long and complex and

politicians use that as a tool. >>moderator: john macgovern did you support the war in iraq and afghanistan? mcgovern: i was not in congress at the time. >>moderator: you were in the country. mcgovern: once we go to war of course, i supported it. >>moderator: the decision? mcgovern: i don't have all the facts that were available. it turns out some facts were not facts that led them to decide to go into a rack and afghanistan. that situation in my mind is more clear and reasonable. i strongly oppose bowing to war to bring democracy to other countries. there are enemies and a threat, you destroy them. it is absolute madness to

think week could brain democracy to other countries. the main issue for me you don't do that by getting distracted around the world. i feel the same way about libya but don't get involved with foreign wars at this time. >>moderator: bernie sanders did you support appropriations for afghanistan? sanders: i approve to some and i opposed some of them. the record is very clear with no misunderstanding. beverly voting against the war and iraq and sometimes it is true there are big bills things you like and things you do not.

but i thought it would be wrong especially given whiff of soldiers to think there set them for their service even though i did not agree. >>moderator: a final comment on this question. moss: my plan weeds initiative for recall for a direct democracy that means i will change the war powers act to require a national referendum for a majority your supermajority before any commences by the is

united states. amen. >>moderator: the next question deals with fellow incoming heating assistance budget. it is an e-mail question from us six junction is inappropriate to cut funding during the economic crisis to create additional the? low in the coming heating assistance program is that the appropriate? sanders: -- bernie sanders? sanders: it is not. those who depend on trannineteen not to go cold. i led the funding up of 5 billion and also led by republicans that

appropriation has been cut and gut. now we're looking not only terrible cuts but of the ryan budget is implemented you will see cuts of medicare, medicaid and nutrition programs. one of the leaders in congress to defending trannineteen to make sure nobody goes cold. diamondstone: you cannot have guns and butter he once more money for war. you cannot have both. it is a contradiction. he is the gigantic lie to say he is in favor of the programs and other people knock it down but he is primarily responsible.

$3 billion more to the zionist government and palestine. he is in favor of cutting the military budget but votes for it every single time. 43 members did not vote to for that legislation. here is the roll-call. house resolution end 104, march 21st comment 2003. those who did not vote for it including people like ron paul. ericson: avello and come heating assistance program is essential for people to keep their homes. if you cannot heat your home's the pipes will freeze in the home is destroyed.

there is only one problem. people will apply and around december they get a benefit amount paid to the fuel dealer but it is not enough to last the winter then people will call. sanders: begging and pleading for more fuel assistance. then later in march they will get the sec dent all lot net. so they are used to begging for more fuel assistance we cannot survive the winter. why can't we just getting enough just like the food stamp program why is in the fuel assistance program run like the food stamp program?

laframboise: the transeventeen solves the problem through the united states amendment. section 8, all bills must be presented in conversational english no longer of five pages a summary, 40 pages of executive 20 pages of the administrative details. section two also the sense have the right to a living wage that provides basic necessity depending care, commuting, health, she lter, higher education if required by a employer. building it into the u.s. constitution employers have to pay a living wage is the way to solve the problem of low heat and begging the

government for favors. mcgovern: i am concerned about the debt in the race to bankruptcy is there will not be many for these programs that everyone is depending on if we continue on this road. politicians coming back with bags of money to hand out will not be there. i believe in smaller government, more freedom, more money with those who create jobs, more urban prosperity less need for the trannineteen program. get out of debt to but it does not matter. the way we're going now

there will not the money for the programs. moss: we live in a system created a of the 1% rich for the benefit to of the 1%. i would change that but we do not have time to review in detail. i would could create a united states department of national security. it includes trannineteen of what under funded people

i don't want to fight. >>moderator: just so i am nuclear, you are concerned with the budget deficit you would allow the budget to go through? mcgovern: it is a side show of the war. the main issue is a year headed to bankruptcy. those will cut off the program they are not survivable. the country cannot continue on this path cannot continue the good things we can do. >>moderator: you would cut this program? mcgovern: say what you want but please. >>moderator: i am blunt

clarity. mcgovern: do not put words in my mouth provided not say i wanted to cut trannineteen. ultimately and what a society where trannineteen is not necessary. bad is my a goal. to say that you will vote for massive debt to and also zero trannineteen is inconsistent. sanders: i think that you did say that the right and budget was quote-unquote to tended did you say that? be clear what the ryan budget does is make devastating cuts of every social program. ending medicare as we know it major cuts in nutrition programs and i have no doubt it is there as well he is

right it is in serious -- the does the serious problems but not to do it on the back of the sick and the poor that is why the larger corporations need to pay their 48 -- there fair share. mcgovern: talking about the rise and budget to solve the debt crisis over 10 years i thought that was too long. that was not endorsement of everything but its direction if i would support tranthirteen i don't know. i have to look at the budget. it is reform of the tax cut to flats in the tax rates

and lower their rates do away with a trillion dollars where it major corporations to get revenues back up with less need for the programs. a way to save our country, our freedoms and in a responsible way. >>moderator: i want to understand in the short-term wooded you cut the funding or not? mcgovern: i would spend as much money as i could get without breaking the budget to pay for those that needed it. the more the government gets out of the way and lets people have their money, i know my church would take

care of poor people. my community would the idea the government does not that they go without is absurd. ericson: my a grandfather was born on a have the farm and used to be legal legalized it again we could pay for it legalizing marijuana and hot -- and hemp will not pay for everything but if it means people freezing to death then pay for fuel assistance with marijuana and have put. >>moderator: you're watching a live debate featuring candidates for the united states senate. moving to health care of the next topic. to discuss health care and if you support the affordable care act otherwise known as obamacare diamondstone: i support

socialized medicine but we cannot get it because it is tied up with a single pager issue to save 20% of the bill but we still end up with day wrought 10 medical system was big pharmaceuticals and hospitals running it with no end to the vioxx 100,000 deaths or the spinal meningitis from injections. those who make the inoculations are like the nuclear power plant. they don't have to have insurance you cannot sue them. you can die but the family cannot sue them but you have to sue the federal government. we support that but not

li-heap? they wonder what is called gridlock it works to their benefit. ericson: after i graduated college 1979 i was a state licensed insurance agent i firmly believe if we pay taxes for something then we should not have middlemen. said the kids to school we don't buy insurance we just do it and the taxes paid for it. if we have been forced to tax for health care than it should the government run clinics and hospitals we should not have no middleman with insurance. "the new york times" also talks about people are being

denied nursing-home and therapies services going before federal judge price and the district court of vermont to try to approve a settlement to enforce it only four years broad term and the senate is only six years then send me so i can fix the problem. laframboise: i am agree we should not have middlemen. that is section two of the u.s. constitutional amendment of vote kiss says a living wage guaranteed that provides employee and one depended with basic necessities including health care with a lifetime cap. the second bill crum vote kiss repeals obamacare replacing it with the bill that the employer has to put

a portion of the employe eight wages into the health savings account that builds into the retirement savings account. the employer is expected to pay for catastrophic health care with a lifetime cap let's say 1 million. that way government stays out of the business of health care, the patient decides there budget issues and their medical issues. mcgovern: i am strongly opposed to the affordable care act a.k.a. obamacare. it was a huge mistake.

23 million out of work and the economy on its knees to make a move to take over one-third of the economy by a government that cannot run the two car parade is the absurdity. 2700 page bill to vote for it before you read it? 15,000 ira's age since being hired to enforce americans to buy insurance? many religious freedom rides have been taken away is a huge mistake. some believe it does not go far enough i think it is the wrong direction. those who cannot find insurance may need to find ways to get them covered and not mess up with a current system.

moss: i am in favor of single-payer. only for medicine and related needs. i blame the incumbents more broadly for not having provided this, but for all of the troubles instead of trying to get financing for the reelection we would not have problems. so for direct democracy and their control i would have a recall. sanders: denied states is the only country that does not guarantee health care as the right of citizenship

bribe voted for the affordable care act after reed doubled funding for community health centers meaning 21 million americans will have access in vermont we went from two centers up that aid to now we have 120,000 people in vermont getting health care and mental-health counseling and prescription drugs. long term we have to move toward single-payer. i hope our small state will lead the nation to make health care as a right in the cost-effective way to cover all of the people. >>moderator: was the government right to bail out chrysler and the other auto companies, cris ericson? laframboise: one more thing. -- . er